Oh, Seth. You sad, cruel boy. This is a blip. Seth's appeal is a mile wide and an inch deep, as we learned in the primary. But, really, what is wrong with him? I think the bigger story here is the epic cruelty of his betrayal. Seth owes his political career, in part, to Dan and Lisa and Raven McShane. And this is his thanks? This? Where is Seth's sense of decency? Oh, well. Whatever. Perhaps this has something to do with

And, for fun. A nice comment stolen from the Herald LTE blogs... More issues to discuss...

"While I appreciate the diplomatic touch of Ms. Russell, let's be honest here:

Pike would be a disastrous mayor. He has no real-world management experience to speak of. Let’s take a moment (well, a few moments) and think about all the times he's lied either outright or by omission during the campaign. He breathes lies. Let's summarize just a few of his tricks so far:

1. Chuckanut Ridge. Before the primary election, Pike tells the Southside that's he's for moving Chuckanut Ridge "into public ownership." He wins the Southside during the primary. He then tells two neighborhood activists privately that he "made a mistake" in telling the Southside that. (Direct quote.) When pressed to reveal his "mistake" publicly because he’s being flagrantly deceptive otherwise, he refuses. (Why should he, he’s no doubt thinking. He’s got ‘em ALL fooled. Shameless and cruel.) On October 16th, in a desperate bid to continue lying and pandering for votes on the Southside, he proposes something that’s illegal in order to buy Chuckanut Ridge! (By the way, folks, his proposal will NEVER happen. He just wants you to be fooled long enough for Southsiders to vote for him. Unreal.) I’m not sure Mr. Pike would make it through a year without going to jail.

2. Pike’s education. I think this is worth in-depth consideration, particularly since he prides himself on it and uses it like a shield against all doubters. (Well, I’d say he conveys something akin to hubris bordering on madness, when it comes to his education.) He tells you he’s got a degree from Huxley and Harvard. Here’s what he’s not telling:

Mr. Pike started his undergraduate career at an infamously conservative college in Indiana (Goshen) in 1975. After two years, he dropped out. In 1981, he enrolled in Wenatchee Valley. In 1982, he dropped out. In 1982, he enrolled at WWU. In 1984, he dropped out. (See a pattern?) In 1992, he enrolls at WWU. In 1994, he graduates. Whew. So there’s Mr. Pike’s stellar undergraduate career: It took him 17 years to get a BA. I would not make light of this history, were it not for the fact that he thinks of himself as some kind of genius (he’s not) and denigrates Mr. McShane’s stellar academic record.

So given Mr. Pike’s sorted undergraduate career, how in the heck did he get into Harvard? Think about. How? Well, as it turns out, it didn’t get him into Harvard. Not the real Harvard. Not the one that actually requires requirements for admission. Mr. Pike matriculated in a “Mid-Career MPA” program that’s not a part of the regular KSG graduate programs. Basically, ANYONE with a few years of work experience, a few letters of recommendation, and $74,000 to burn can get a Mid-Career MPA. (Heck, Katherine Harris got one!) The program lasts only one year, which includes a portion of time devoted to “remedial” instruction. (So about nine months + a few remedial courses.) Basically, it’s easy money for KSG, and the program has all the academic credibility of an unaccredited vocational school in the Dominican Republic. I tell you no lie. Don’t believe me? Here are direct quotes from the program’s website:

“Is there a minimum GRE/GMAT or GPA required to apply? We do not require a minimum score for the GRE/GMAT examination or a minimum GPA.”

"Mid-Career MPA applicants are not required to meet any academic prerequisites...."

Still can’t believe it? Look it up yourself: http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/apply/FAQ.htm

(By the way, you’d think the Herald or any other news organization would do this sort of thing. But in Bellingham, we don’t have journalists—certainly not at the Herald. We have PR firms. The Herald is a PR firm for Pike and for others—like the Port of Bellingham.)

3. Lake Whatcom. After hearing about Dan McShane’s idea for the Lake Whatcom Department, Mr. Pike starts talking about a “Lake Czar.” And he proclaims repeatedly that he’s for boats off. As the campaign wears on and Mr. Pike gets wrapped with wades of cash from developers, realtors and the Port of Bellingham (go ahead---it’s all there in the C-3s), he starts changing his tune on a whole host of issues in freakish displays of ad hoc incoherence. NOW he’s for boats on the lake. NOW he’s against the “Lake Czar.”

4. Project Manager of FAST Corridor Freight Mobility Project. Mr. Pike has repeatedly claimed that he “managed a $500 million” transportation project? The truth. He absolutely did not MANAGE any such thing. This is one of the grand deceptions of the Pike campaign. He MANAGED nothing. That’s the operative word in this deception---managed. He did not MANAGE money or people. For the FAST project, he told the Herald on October 7th that he had NO EMPLOYEES. But three days later, at the NW Business Club Forum, he said he had “3 or 4 employees.” (He said this lie after Mr. McShane stated he’d managed over 50 people on a multi-year $36 million SuperFund cleanup project. And that’s like Mr. Pike, isn’t it? Like a small child, he’ll try to “one up” his opponent with a lie, like this was a schoolyard game of who’s the “bigger man.”) The truth? He had absolutely no staff under him. None. This has been repeatedly confirmed. Mr. Pike has never hired anyone in his life or fired anyone in his life. He’s never written a check for an employee. Mr. Pike has absolutely no management experience whatsoever. Mr. Pike has so wrapped himself up in a web of lies that he can’t keep track of them all.

It’s truly pathetic to watch Mr. Pike try to cover up this lie, this CRIME of influence peddling. At the October 16th KGMI debate, Mr. Pike said that “Don Keenan did not approach me” about an endorsement in return for a job. True in and of itself, but an outright lie of omission. DAN PIKE APPROACHED DON KEENAN. Listen for yourself at www.kgmi.com

I could go on and on. (And I will at another time and place---like before the Public Disclosure Commission.) Mr. Pike’s is utterly lacking in integrity. He’s a “confidence man” who’ll tell you exactly what you want to here. He’s incredibly mean-spirited and is simply out to win at all costs.

"I Like Pike"? What the heck does that mean? That campaign slogan is all about personality. Karl Rove would be more than a little impressed with some of the tricks in the Pike Campaign Toolbox.Larry Cauldron | 10.20.07 - 3:33 pm | #

Love the site - no matter who's behind it. This last comment was very revealing and I'm totally concerned that the Herald is not running all the lies that Pike is spewing forth. Seriously, 19 years to finish his undergrad degree? What excuse is there for that???

I see a lot of parallels between the Pike campaign and GWB's first run for president-- he exudes an optimism, seems like a nice guy, a consensus builder, a listener, no pre-conceived plan, down-home while the other guy is stuffy etc.

SUDDEN VALLEY CITYIn the most recent CW, DanMcShane attempts to “clear”his record with regard to theSudden Valley Urban GrowthArea (SVUGA). As someonewho, along with other LakeWhatcom activists, opposedthe SVUGA from the outset, Ifound his attempt to fall farshort of its intended mark.The partial history of theSVUGA with regard to the WhatcomCounty Council can be listedas follows: The SV UGA wasfi rst considered by the Planningand Development Committee(on which Dan McShaneserved) on Feb. 20, 2001, fordocketing. At that meeting, itwas voted 2-1 in favor of docketingwith McShane in favor(Connie Hoag was opposed).On March 20, 2001, it was consideredby the full council fordocketing, with council votingin favor 6-1. Again McShanevoted in favor of docketing(and again Hoag was the onlycouncil member opposed). Atthis point, the proposal hadnot yet been amended andwas forwarded to the PlanningCommission. The commission passed itwith revisions and sent it back to thePlanning and Development Committeefor reconsideration on Sept. 25, 2001.With a tie vote of 1-1 and McShane nowopposed (one committee member absent),the SVUGA then went to the fullcouncil. The record shows that most ofthe amendments McShane claims creditfor were already present when theSVUGA reached his committee.At the full council meeting on Sept.25, 2001, McShane introduced the proposal.He asked that a public hearingbe held, as there was no recommendationfrom his committee. This was defeated,and the SVUGA was forwardedto the full County Council without apublic hearing on a 5-2 vote (McShaneand Brenner opposed this time). At theDec. 11, 2001 full council meeting, theSVUGA—in all of its ugliness—passedon a vote of 5-1 with only council memberBrenner in opposition this time(one council member was absent). DanMcShane voted in favor of the SVUGAat this meeting.Additionally, McShane, cites a significant downzone of surrounding areasto rural as a result of amendments tothe SVUGA he claims title to. However,the record shows that no downzones ofsurrounding areas occurred in concertwith the SVUGA. The downzoned areasMcShane refers to (mostly the Firs’ CampFirwood) had their zoning designationschanged (initially on an interim basis)in June 2002, well after the SVUGApassed. This latter downzone occurredafter the council added members Roy,Fleetwood and Caskey-Schreiber. At thispoint McShane certainly had the votesto also rescind the SVUGA, but failed toshow any leadership on the issue.That doesn’t sound quite like whatMcShane would have us believe. At thetime the SVUGA passed, many peoplewere puzzled as to why McShane, whohad been an ally on many Lake Whatcomissues, would vote in favor of thisproposal. Sure, as he stated in his letter,it would still pass even if he votedagainst it. But why vote for it? I concludedat the time, and maintain tothis day, that McShane voted in favorof the SVUGA for purely political reasons—he would be up for re-electionin 2003 and didn’t want to alienate anySV residents whose support he wouldlikely need. I think his recent explanation(that voting against it wouldhave been politically expedient) is revisionisthistory—it only looks like itwould have been politically expedientin hindsight.This recent attempt at revisionisthistory by McShane shows why I havebecome very disillusioned by him—he is simply not honest. I suppose wehave quite a few other politicians whoare also not entirely on the up-and-up;McShane is just another one of those.Fortunately, Bellingham residentshave a much better choice for mayor—Dan Pike is a smart, honest, experiencedleader who will serve the citywell. I like Pike!

Editor’s Note: In a follow-up note, DanMcShane apologized for a failure ofhis memory six years after his vote onSVUGA and does essentially agree withTom Pratum’s process timeline and theorder of votes (although, obviously, notwith Pratum’s conclusions). McShanesays, “It was and still is my opinionthat there was some net benefi t to theprovisional UGA. I believe reducing thedensity around and within Sudden Valleyand the work of Sudden Valley toremove 1,400 lots in their associationwas a small but reasonable step forLake Whatcom, and represented whatwas possible in 2001.”